Thursday, September 17, 2020

You Know Who Madison Cawthorn Is-- Now Meet The Democrat Who Is Going To Save North Carolina And The U.S.A. From ThisNeo-Fascist Little Goon

>





North Carolina’s 11th district on the western edge of the state includes the stunning Blue Ridge Mountains, Great Smoky Mountains National Park and some of the most beautiful forests, waterfalls and vistas in the country. It also includes Asheville, a small, artsy, craft beer-loving liberal city that anchors this district … but hardly defines it. Asheville and some of Buncombe County are a bright blue dot in a sea of deep red conservative voters. Despite redrawn lines that ended the gerrymander and Republican stranglehold on the 11th, there remains a highly divided electorate in this still red-leaning district that makes challenging it challenging for a Democrat.

This year though, NC-11 has a really exception candidate, Moe Davis, former Chief Prosecutor at Guantanamo, who retired over the government's use of torture. An Air Force colonel (ret.) and former Director of the Air Force Judiciary, Davis is up against the GOP's "it boy," Madison Cawthorn who isn't even in office yet and has been caught lying about:
the Naval Academy, which he says was going to take him but in reality rejected him before his accident.
being a CEO of a real estate investment firm
being a motivational speaker. (Cawthorn has not held any job since 2016, when he worked part-time answering phones and reading news clips for then Rep. Mark Meadows, and has never held a full-time adult job.)
being accepted at Harvard-- where he never really applied
being in the military, allowing Fox Business anchor Maria Bartiromo to say he had served his country, when he never did, pretending his tragic car accident was related to battlefield valor
Goal ThermometerInstead, Madison Cawthorn has been credibly accused by numerous women of sexual misconduct, is a semi-closeted white nationalist, neo-Nazi and admirer of Adolph Hitler, a shameless COVID-denier, host of numerous super-spreader events and a crackpot conspiracy-theory nut. He's very ambitious and sees the NC-11 House seat as a stepping stone to a Senate race [presumably against Cal Cunningham in 2026]. I invited Moe Davis to introduce himself to DWT readers by way of a guest post on the broadband problem in western North Carolina. Please hear him out and consider contributing to his campaign here or by tapping on the Blue America 2020 Trump District Democrats thermometer on the right.


Digital Divide In Western North Carolina
-by Moe Davis


Broadband internet is no longer a luxury. It is a necessity for business, education, medicine and service in the 21st Century. But in some counties of rural Western North Carolina, as many as 50 percent or more lack access to broadband.

That has to change.

I support Rep. Jim Clyburn’s Accessible, Affordable Internet for All bill that will provide $80 billion to help extend broadband to rural areas throughout Western North Carolina.

Homework Gap

Covid-19 has greatly exacerbated the long-standing digital divide that disadvantages rural students. Students without access to broadband have had difficulties doing homework that requires the internet for quite some time now. Distance learning due to the pandemic has made this issue critical and urgent. We cannot allow our children to fall behind. Seeing students sitting in cars with their parents in the parking lots of local libraries and schools doing schoolwork has become common place throughout WNC. It is unacceptable.

Telehealth

Telemedicine has been growing in popularity even before the pandemic, and has seen a boon in the last 6 months. We can expect this pattern to continue even after the pandemic is over as we have entered a new era in medicine. Doctors are monitoring their patients with biofeedback software that requires high speed internet connection. Diabetics can measure their blood sugars with an app, if they have connectivity, cancer patients can receive treatments without going to the doctor’s office or hospital. We can expect a more efficient and cost effective medical care system but every patient needs access to it for cost reductions to be optimum. We can close the gap in health outcomes between rural and urban citizens when we close the digital gap.

Public Safety

Rural communities have a disadvantage when first responders cannot access patient information such as allergies, recent medical procedures and more when responding to unconscious patients. When folks cannot get “Silver Alerts” or “Amber Alerts” when children or the elderly go missing, we delay finding the vulnerable. Our elderly need life alert systems also. Our citizens need home protection systems that require broadband connection. Law enforcement officers need access to personal background information while responding to dangerous situations like domestic violence calls.

Economic Development

Now that we know so many folks can work from home, I expect that trend to continue. This means that many more people who love our mountains can move here regardless of who they work for. Entrepreneurs and other companies can be free to open business here, stimulating and growing our economy. Green jobs can explode as farmers turn to growing hemp for the production of plant based “plastics”. Those plastics can be produced right here in Dist 11 also. This vision for a green economy in WNC is only possible if we ensure 100% broadband access throughout the district. Broadband access is a right and should be considered a utility much like electricity. NC H129 needs to be overturned allowing local municipalities to offer broadband.


Labels: , , , , ,

Wednesday, March 15, 2017

Believe It Or Not, Broadband Access Is More Important In Peoples' Lives Than Putin-Gate

>


Virginia's first congressional district is one of those bizarre gerrymanders that makes no sense for anyone but Republican career politicians. It's an odd concotion that stretches through 22 counties from the DC exurbs in Prince William, Fauquier and Stafford counties down through Fredericksburg south to the suburbs north of Norfolk in Middlesex, Mathews and Newport News counties. In 2012 Romney beat Obama 56.2% to 43.8%. Last year both Trump and Clinton did worse, respectively, than Romney and Obama. Trump won 53.6% to 41.2%. The incumbent congressman, Rob Wittman, first elected in a 2007 special election after Jo Ann Davis died, hasn't ever had a DCCC challenge. Last year he was elected against Matt Rowe 60.9% to 35.8%. He won every county in the district but one (Fredericksburg). Whittman spent $1,040,883 on the election and Rowe spent $45,755. The DCCC never acknowledged he was even running.

In 2018 the Democratic candidate is a progressive former Marine and a young father, Edwin Santana Jr. He lives in Stafford County with his wife and son. And they're having a daughter in a couple of months. We asked him to introduce himself to DWT readers by tackling an issue of local importance unlike the big national issues like TrumpCare, Putin-Gate, Climate Change, etc-- but something that would make his constituents' lives better. Before you read it, though, I want you to think about one related matter-- This is how scared Wittman already is of Santana's challenge (from Wittman's Facebook page):
"After reviewing this legislation and receiving the Congressional Budget Office score today, it is clear that this bill is not consistent with the repeal and replace principles for which I stand. I do not think this bill will do what is necessary for the short and long-term best interests of Virginians and therefore, I must oppose it. I do believe that we can enact meaningful health care reforms that put the patient and health care provider back at the center of our health care system, but this bill is not the right answer. This doesn’t change the fact that we need to repeal Obamacare, as I have voted to do. I stand ready and willing to work with my colleagues on legislation that expands choices, increases access, and reduces costs.”

Connecting Virginians to the 21st Century
-by Edwin Santana Jr.,
candidate, VA-01


It wasn’t that long ago that I can remember watching anxiously as the yellow AOL man trudged begrudgingly from left to right across the computer screen as the digital subscriber line, what we all know as DSL, connected me to the phenomenon that was the world-wide web. While the internet has been in existence for quite some time, it was just becoming widely commercially available in the late 1990’s and early 2000’s. By my senior year in high school, the internet was being rapidly integrated into everyday life-- Facebook launched shortly before my freshman year of college. At school, program suites, such as Blackboard and online databases like JSTOR (short for Journal Storage, founded 1995) were still in their nascent stages and relegated to the obscure realm of academia. Taking the internet’s technological evolution into perspective, it is clear today that the use of-- and as a prerequisite, access to-- the internet has become an integral part of our daily lives.

Today the internet serves as the primary medium through which we interact with the world around us. Education, business, healthcare and many other facets of society have increasingly integrated the use of high-speed broadband internet into their operating concepts. As such, access to high-speed broadband internet no longer remains a luxury, but instead is now an essential requirement. Far from the enhancement that the web brought to our lives a decade ago, without access to reliable and fast internet, you are now “out of the loops” in a world that is deeply interconnected and constantly evolving.

While wireless carriers such as AT&T and Verizon purport national coverage, 4G wireless connectivity has been replaced by LTE and Apple continues to pump out the latest version of their iPhone-- the fact remains that there are still far too many Americans who lack access to adequate high speed internet. While this is a problem that tends to be concentrated on the socioeconomic strata and demographics most in need in our communities, it particularly effects those in less populated, rural areas where private Internet Service Providers (ISP) have had less incentive to establish mature fiber-optic networks capable of providing next generation high speed broadband internet.

But we aren’t talking about excessive luxury or “nice-to-have” here, we are talking about providing essential services and investing in the future of our communities. The National Broadband Plan, released by the FCC in 2010, provides a comprehensive overview of initiatives the FCC and other federal agencies have set forth in an attempt to increase digital literacy and realize a future in which universal broadband access is a reality for all Americans.

Under the leadership of Governor Terry McAuliffe, the Commonwealth has also made significant gains in providing access to high speed internet available in the state’s schools. In partnership with EducationSuperHighway, a non-profit organization dedicated to improving internet access across the nation, the Governor’s office announced that 72 percent of Virginia’s schools met the minimum connectivity requirement of 100 kbs per student as specified by the FCC. This statistic is a drastic improvement from the 33 percent reported in the non-profits annual state of the states reported just two years earlier in 2014. Access within school systems is essential, but it isn’t the whole picture. As the education system increasingly integrates into online networks and resources, access to quality high-speed internet at home has become as important element to the whole family. Broadband is a requirement for homework, home business and correspondence. Increasingly, people can keep in contact with their healthcare providers from home via web portals. In the “internet of things” the web is increasingly connecting people, their homes and appliances, with the outside world. Just a few of the obvious benefits to these developments here include increased energy efficiency and home security. As exciting as this future sounds, it is a future that can only be realized in a state that enables that tomorrow, today through the investment in the required infrastructure and resources.

While we can’t force the hand of private entities to provide services to rural areas, other options do exist. Municipalities have been trying for several years to bridge the gap within their communities where citizens are unserved or are offered low-quality services as unreasonable costs. The National Broadband Plan specifically recommended that Congress should make clear that local governments can build broadband networks. Federal legislation, like the Broadband Conduit Act of 2015 (HR 3805), was introduced with the intent of building new infrastructure, such as future road networks designed to readily incorporate new fiber optic cable lines without the need for disruptive additional digging. Unfortunately, there are also initiatives at the state level that create barriers to bridging the gap in connectivity across our communities.

The Virginia Broadband Deployment Act (HB 2108), currently on Governor McAuliffe’s desk after passing the Commonwealth’s House and Senate represents one such barrier, preventing public entities from providing broadband services in unserved areas. The bill, introduced by Lynchburg Republican Kathy Byron creates a list of requirements required to be met by any locality that intends to own and operate a broadband or internet communications system3. In a clear move to insulate private interests, the bill mandates imputed private sector costs to any municipality-led effort, which would deter many local entities from offering broadband services to their citizens at reasonable costs1. Imputed private-sector costs is analogous to price-fixing and can be best understood by a portion of the bill itself. Section 56-484.30 subdivision 2.a states:
“The locality or its affiliate shall include within its rates an amount equal to all taxes, fees, and other assessments that would be applicable to a similarly situated private provider of the same communications services, including federal, state, and local taxes; franchise fees; permit fees; pole attachment fees; and any similar fees.”
It is worth noting that the Virginia Association of Counties, has stated that this legislation is not conducive to establishing successful partnerships between private ISPs and municipally run efforts3. The bill was introduced by Delegate Byron but engineered by the Virginia Cable Telecommunications Association, allows ISPs to have their cake and eat it too. By effectively raising the barrier to entry, ISP’s are not required to compete with municipalities who attempt to provide services on their own initiative while simultaneously insulating themselves from the costs of providing essential services to citizens in unserved areas. Section 56-484.30 subdivision 2.b states goes further to ward of potential competition:
“The locality or its affiliate shall not price any of its communications services at a level that is less than the sum of:(i) the actual direct costs of providing the service; (ii) the actual indirect costs of providing the service; and (iii) the amount determined under subdivision 2a.”
While there is an aversion to government led initiatives in the services sector, there are success stories of municipalities partnering with service providers to connect citizens. The Utopia Regional Fiber Consortium of Bristol, Virginia certainly has its flaws, but provides proof that locality-ran efforts in providing broadband services to constituents is a distinct possibility.

It is difficult to quantify the benefits of providing connectivity in a world where the internet touches almost every facet of our daily lives. Today, people use the internet to keep in touch with relatives, medical providers, engage in distance learning and to run businesses. Investing in the infrastructure required for expansion of these services-- particularly into areas currently unserved by independent providers-- is an investment in the productivity of our people and our communities. Where ISP’s won’t provide services due to limited potential of short-term profits, the least we should expect our state’s elected representatives to do is get out of the way of locality-run efforts to bridge the gap in providing essential services to our citizens. Sadly, given some of the recent actions by some of our elected representatives-- particularly the ones bankrolled by these ISPs-- it seems that private interests take a front seat to constituent needs. Investing in Virginia’s future prosperity should not be tied so closely to the bottom line of shareholders and business modeling should not be the sole litmus test on whether residents of Virginia receive access to broadband services in an age where being connected is everything.

Labels: , , , , ,

Wednesday, May 18, 2016

Another Congressional Race On The Board-- VA-05

>




Virginia is one of the richest states, but much of that wealth is concentrated in the DC surbubs. The state's median income is $67,620, third highest nationally. The three districts that include parts of Fairfax County have median incomes in the $100,000 range. But in the southern part of the state, incomes dip precipitously. The 21 counties and 2 cities that make up the mostly rural New Jersey-sized 5th district have a median income of $47,972 and the poverty rate is 15.1%, significantly above the commonwealth's 9.2%. The economy of much of Southside is still in recession and still suffering from job losses caused in large part by unfair trade deals that didn't hurt the DC suburbs or exurbs at all, although efforts are being made to turn Danville into a tech hub. Obama lost the 5th both times he ran with 48% against McCain and with 46% against Romney.

2016, however, looks like it could be a good year for Democrats. The Republican candidate is state Senator Tom Garrett, a far right extremist who backed Cruz during the primary has already pledged his allegiance to Trump, which isn't likely to go over all that well among many independent voters in the district. The Democratic candidate, Jane Dittmar is a big fan of both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders. She's the immediate past Chair of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors and former representative of the Scottsville District. Through her supervisorial position, she was appointed to the Governor’s Broadband Advisory Council. Much of experience, though, is in the private sector as a principal in Positive Solutions Group, a firm specializing in mediation, arbitration, and training services, and a business consultant specializing in strategic planning. A university of Virginia economics graduate, she served as President of the Charlottesville Regional Chamber of Commerce for nearly a decade. Most recently, Jane became the first recipient of the Charlottesville-Albemarle Bar Association Liberty Bell Award. So far the DCCC hasn't gotten involved with the race in VA-05.

When I asked Jane why she decided to run for the congressional seat-- and she decided even before incumbent Robert Hurt announced his retirement-- she talked to me about a topic no other candidate had mentioned, rural internet access. It reminded me of the old battle over rural electrification that was such a major part of the New Deal and was so bitterly opposed by Republicans who screamed "socialism," even though only 10% of rural homes had electricity when President Roosevelt forced the issue with an Executive Order.

Rural Broadband
Guest Post by Jane Dittmar


An estimated 283,860 people in Virginia’s 5th congressional district are without broadband. In 9 of our 23 areas, more than 50% of the population is living without broadband access in their homes.

The fact that areas of our district do not have Internet or cell service is something that many of us find hard to believe. Those who have reliable access often assume that everyone in the Commonwealth shares in the same opportunities. The reality is, while some areas in our district are connected with advanced fiber optic technology, many rural localities only have the option of purchasing cost-prohibitive, unreliable Internet-- if that is even available.

Our neighbors are without access to basic information, telemedicine, emergency services, online job postings, telecommuting opportunities, and much, much more. Children, whose homework increasingly relies on Internet resources, fall behind. The Pew Research Center estimates that low-income homes with children are 4-times more likely to be without broadband. With all of the obstacles our education system already faces, creating yet another roadblock to success will be crippling to the futures of our children. I know that resources already exist in Washington-- grants, programs, and funds from the USDA, the FCC, and many others-- to enable everyone to have affordable, reliable Internet access, and I will work relentlessly to ensure that those resources are brought home to the 5th district so that we all may share in America’s promise of equal opportunity.

Labels: , , , , ,

Wednesday, January 02, 2013

The intrepid Genachowski FCC brings yet another industry stooge on board

>


by Ken

As Howie and I have had all too frequent occasion to report, not many Obama appointments have been as disapointing as FCC Chair Julius Genachowski, who came to the job with what most observers familiar with the turf thought were pretty good credentials, but who has established himself almost without exception as a trusty servant of Big Media and the telecom industries.

While we've all been preoccupied with the fiscal-cliff follies and our normal holiday preoccupations, the other day Karl Bode of the blog Broadband Reports passed along news of another fine development at Genachowski's FCC (links onsite):

FCC Hires New Cap Loving Chief Economist - New Employee Steven Wildman Paid by Industry to Defend Caps
Steven Wildman Previously Used by ISPs to Justify Caps
by Karl Bode

The FCC has hired a new chief economist with a history of cheerleading broadband usage caps for the cable industry. According to the FCC, they've hired Steven Wildman, an economist and professor at Michigan State University, as the agency's new chief economist. In a statement, FCC boss Julius Genachowski insists that Wildman will help the agency by applying "his deep economic expertise and problem solving abilities daily to our most challenging initiatives."

Except Wildman just got done penning a National Cable & Telecommunications Association paper supporting the industry's use of punitive caps and costly per-byte overages. "...The effects of well-designed [usage-based pricing] plans on consumers are likely to be beneficial, as are the effects of UBP on investments in the broadband infrastructure," insisted Wildman in the cable industry sponsored paper (pdf).

That claim runs contrary to the facts on the ground. Wildman only has to ask Canadian broadband customers in our forums, who suffer from the most egregious caps and overages in the world, just how much the pricing model has "benefited" them.

Like with most of these industry-funded studies, Wildman ignores the fact that the lack of competition drives the creation of punitive caps and overages in the first place, and that few if any of these plans are "well designed." Most of what we've seen implemented by carriers so far isn't really usage-based pricing, it's flat rate pricing with caps and per-byte penalties layered on top, resulting in higher prices for everybody.

Without real competition, there's nothing preventing caps from squeezing tighter or overage penalties from soaring, but industry-paid economists avoid that problem by simply not mentioning it. In fact, Wildman's paper only even uses the word "competition" once, and not in any meaningful context. Wildman and other academics paid to use their academic credibility as a blunt weapon against consumers have been trotted out by the cable industry at several industry round tables recently to justify what the cap and overage model really is: price gouging.

Wildman's hiring is troubling for an agency that has already utterly refused to seriously address the anti-competitive impact of usage caps and high overage pricing. Genachowski's positions on caps have waffled depending on what lobbyists or industry leaders he's talking to, and that's just part of a larger FCC problem with failing to address competition. Worse perhaps, is the agency's refusal to seriously address the growing problem of usage meters simply not being inaccurate, a result of carriers wanting to bill like utilities, but refusing to be regulated like them.
So, as the U.S. slips farther and farther behind the rest of the developed world in ease and affordability of high-speed broadband access, the FCC is . . . well, gearing up to move us farther backward.
#

Labels: , ,

Tuesday, June 03, 2008

Do you suppose we're likely to hear much in the general election campaign about the growing part of America that's been left out of the economy?

>

One of the reasons I was sorry that John Edwards proved to be such a blah presidential candidate is that I would have liked to hear more about what follows from his diagnosis of "Two Americas."

Under the Bush regime, of course, it has been considered somewhere between un-American and heretical to talk about class divides in the country. "Class warfare!" the priestly defenders of higher-class privilege have shouted every time anyone attempts to point out how systematically non-higher-class Americans have been excluded from, well, everything. Why, the country went through what was proclaimed to be an economic boom from which we were simply excluded, and because we had been officially declared economic nonpersons, no one in authority seemed to notice or care. I doubt very much that anyone even mentioned it to the president, for fear of disrupting his beauty sleep.

Maybe one reason Edwards's "Two Americas" theme didn't resonate is that most of us know that there are, at minimum, three Americas. Obviously there are clusters at the top and the bottom of the economic ladder. By and large they know who they are, and what their prospects are -- although it appears that the people in those upper strata are feeling the pinch along with the rest of us, if not in quite the same way as the rest of us, if we go by this tear-jerking tale of woe among the upper crust from Sunday's NYT, which seems to me too delicious to excerpt:

It's Not So Easy Being Less Rich
By CHRISTINE HAUGHNEY

NANCY CHEMTOB, a divorce lawyer in Manhattan, has found that her days have become crammed seeing clients, all worried about how an economic downturn will affect their marriages.

They seem to have nothing to fret about: their net worths range from $5 million to $1 billion. A blip in the markets shouldn't send their chateau-size Park Avenue co-ops to foreclosure or exile them to Payless Shoes.

But Ms. Chemtob's clients are concerned all the same, she said, because their incomes have shrunk, say, to $2 million a year from $8 million, and they know that their 2008 bonus checks are likely to be much less impressive.

One of her clients recently confessed that his net worth had decreased to $8 million from more than $20 million, and he thinks that his wife will leave him. He has hidden their fall in fortune by taking on debt to pay for her extravagant clothes and vacations.

"I literally had to sit there and tell him that he had to tell his wife that she had to stop spending," she said. "He was actually scared she would leave him because their financial situation changed so drastically."

The wealthy don't generally speak publicly about their finances, in good times or bad. It's in poor taste, for one, and their employers could fire them for talking even a little. But people who provide services to the wealthy -- lawyers, art advisers, personal trainers and hairstylists -- say they are getting an earful about their clients' financial anxieties.

Interviews with the people who actually see the bank statements, like divorce lawyers and lenders, say their clients are definitely living on less than they did a year ago, regardless of how expansive the definition of "less" may be. Hairstylists and private jet rental companies say the wealthy are cutting back on luxuries like $350 highlights and $10,000-an-hour jet rentals. Even nutritionists and personal trainers notice a problem. The wealthy are eating more and gaining weight because of the stress.

These financial problems -- if they can be called that -- will hardly elicit tears from the rest of us. But in those gilded living rooms, there is a quiet nervousness about keeping up appearances.

"Even if they're not in danger of not paying their mortgage, there's still a psychological change," said Chris Del Gatto, chief executive of Circa, which has watched its business jump by 50 percent in the last year as wealthy clients sell their spare diamonds and Rolexes. "The economy is an issue even for people who don't need the money."

THEIR spouses could leave them when they discover that their net worth has collapsed to eight figures from nine. Friends and business associates could avoid them as they pass their lunchtime tables at Barney's or the Four Seasons. And these snubs could trickle down to their children.

"They fear their kids won't get invited to the right birthday parties," said Michele Kleier, an Upper East Side-based real estate broker. "If they have to give up things that are invisible, they're O.K. as long as they don't have give up things visible to the outside world."

So New York's very wealthy are addressing their distress in discreet and often awkward ways. They try to move their $165 sessions with personal trainers to a time slot that they know is already taken. They agree to tour multimillion-dollar apartments and then say the spaces don't match their specifications. They apply for a line of credit before art auctions, supposedly to buy a painting or a sculpture, but use that borrowed money to pay other debts.

"Most people won't go to their banker and say: ‘You know I'm in desperate trouble. I need funds,' " said Andy Augenblick, president of Emigrant Bank Fine Art Finance, which allows clients to borrow against art collections worth more than $2 million. Mr. Augenblick said that the number of requests for these types of loans is five times higher than a year ago. He said that while these borrowers claim that they don't need the money, their latest financial statements show that their net worth has withered in the past year.

Other wealthy clients are cutting luxuries that they think their friends and relatives won't notice, according to Mr. Del Gatto of Circa. At Circa's midtown offices, he said, the seven consultation rooms have been busy with customers selling their precious gems. Some older couples, he said, are selling estate jewelry to help support their children who have lost Wall Street jobs. Bankers are paring down their collections of Patek Philippe watches. Wives from Greenwich and Scarsdale are selling 2-carat to 35-carat single-stone diamond rings. One recent client explained to Mr. Del Gatto that she was selling $2 million in diamonds she rarely wore, because her friends wouldn't notice that they were gone.

"She said, ‘If I sold my Bentley or my important art, they would notice,' " he said. "That we hear, in differing examples, every day."

Art consultants find that the very wealthy are more receptive to parting with their precious works. Cassie Rosenthal, an owner of the Chelsea gallery Goff & Rosenthal, said that since the subprime crisis hit in the fall, and especially since the new year, some collectors are willing to sell pieces that were off limits in the past. She said that when the deals close quickly, they're happy.

"Most people will just sort of say: ‘Will you sell this for me? When you can get me payment?' " Ms. Rosenthal said. "It's more about the urgency of getting paid."

Justin Sullivan, managing director of Regent Jet, which leases private airplanes, said most clients in real estate and on Wall Street are switching to chartered jets over private jets, and cutting their flight budgets by about 25 percent. One New York real estate developer cut his budget to less than $250,000 a year from $1.5 million a year.

"A year ago, he would have only flown Gulfstreams," Mr. Sullivan said. "Now it's moving to the point where he's flying Beech jets and Learjets."

Some wealthy New Yorkers are even cutting back on relatively smaller things. At J Sisters, a midtown Manhattan salon where celebrities like Naomi Campbell and Gwyneth Paltrow mingle with Wall Street clients, stylists and colorists say they hear about money worries all day. On a spring afternoon, a half-dozen hairstylists to the very wealthy talked about how customers are stretching their $350 highlights and $150 haircuts to every eight weeks instead of six weeks. Some women are cutting out highlights entirely, saying they would "rather be brunettes."

Jean-François Pilon, a stylist at J Sisters, has seen many women come less frequently and tip less generously. During the subprime crisis last summer, and the collapse of Bear Stearns last March, he said, many clients tried to stretch out their visits. He interprets these changes in behavior as signs that they need to watch their spending.

"You pick up on it very quickly," he said. "People don't beg."

The drop in wealth has also exposed other personal problems, like bad marriages. Money -- which bought jewelry or extravagant vacations -- helped smooth over many of these difficulties, said Kenneth Mueller, a psychotherapist in the East Village who works with many Wall Street bankers and real estate developers. Now, he said, his clients "catastrophize" smaller bonuses or shriveling stock portfolios. "You have to remind them that there's something that has always been there," he said. "All the money helped mask the anxiety."

The very wealthy can't hide anything from their nutritionists and personal trainers, because they see the weight gain. Heather Bauer, a dietitian who works with many Wall Street executives who pay $600 to $800 a month for her services, says her clients have been eating and drinking more in the last six months. She sees results of this indulging each time they step on a scale, and in their journals that record what they've eaten.

One Wall Street executive, Ms. Bauer said, snacks on nuts in her office all day to manage the stress of potentially losing her position, while another confesses to inhaling four bowls of cereal at 10 p.m. Even their sex lives are suffering, Ms. Bauer said, because of the stress or because the weight gain makes them feel unattractive.

Her clients blame the economy for their out-of-control waistlines.

"The number one concern that they have is the state of the financial market," she said. "There definitely is a correlation between the stock market and weight gain."

Clay Burwell, a personal trainer to many Wall Street executives, said that his clients were also feeling the toll. A year of eating more, drinking more and working longer hours has started to hurt their health.

"They come into the gym with a dark storm cloud over their head," he said. "They look like hell."

The third America consists of all the rest of us in between. What Edwards was tapping into is that more and more of us in the wide middle feel closer to the bottom group than to the top. And the reality of the Bush regime's aggressive promotion of the rich and super-rich is that people higher and higher up on the economic ladder have found themselves looking down rather than up.

When we try to imagine a future America, one of the baseline terrors is online access, and it's hard to see what's going to happen to make that less of a separator between the economic Americas. And this isn't a worry just for the traditional poor. I now have excellent onlne access at work and pretty good access at home, because my digital-cable-TV-and-broadband package is my one luxury. I have an okay-paying job, but with no raises in recent memory and no prospects -- the best I can hope is to hold onto that job. And if at some point I decide to try to "retire," I know that one thing I won't have any hope of affording is my cable-broadband package.

Maybe that's what made me so sensitive to this report from our friend Martin at Boztopia. Well, that and the fact that Time Warner Cable is my cable company:

Metered Broadband Won't Bridge the Digital Divide

The big news in tech circles today is that Time Warner is beginning its trial of metered broadband pricing in Beaumont, Texas. As you might expect, it’s a combination of absurdly high prices and very low caps–the lowest tier of service is 768kps, capped out at 5 gigabytes per month, at $30 (before state and local taxes, I assume). Even a cursory browsing of the Internet’s many options for video (both downloaded and streaming) could get you hitting your limit without realizing it.

It’s that kind of visionary forward thinking that has Time Warner spinning off said unprofitable cable unit in the first place. But there’s a larger issue at work–the fact that all the pricing schemes in the world are no substitute for building networks strong enough to handle the massive amounts of rich content available to users today, and that many users are being locked out of access to that content in the first place.

As I wrote back in January when news of the experiment broke, there is a massive gap in access between those who regularly use the Internet, and those who do not–or cannot. This June 1 Chicago Tribune article beautifully illustrates how people who don’t have regular Internet access–usually the poor, more often than not Black or Latino, too often women–can be almost completely barred from participating in our modern society:

Two years ago, Smith’s daughter gave her a used computer with the hope it would improve her life. High-speed Internet service is available in the West Woodlawn neighborhood where Smith, 53, has lived for 15 years. But the computer sits idle because Smith, a security guard, can’t afford the charges that can add from $20 to $33 or more to monthly phone bills. Increased costs of rent, food and utility bills have made it harder for her to get by, she said. As she sat on the steps of a two-flat where she lives near 63rd Street and Cottage Grove Avenue, she spoke almost wistfully of what life might be like if she could cross the digital divide. “I feel like I’m missing out on something,” Smith said. “I could pay my bills online, I could shop online, I could even send out resumes to find a better-paying job.”

It’s amazing to think that the kind of uses we have for the Web–that we take for granted every time we log on to our blogs, Web sites, social networks, and the like–are inaccessible to people right here in this country, allegedly the wealthiest and most developed nation on Earth. To paraphrase Walt Mossberg’s infamous questioning of FCC chairman and telecom hack Kevin Martin, “How could you let this happen?”As Drew Clark chronicles here, it’s going to take more than even measuring broadband availability to address the problem. We have to commit to the idea of the Internet as a public good, accessible to all of us through a variety of ways. This means everything from supporting buildouts of municipal Wi-fi connections and hotspots to ensuring that incumbent telecom and cable networks don’t avoid their responsibility to reach every part of a community when introducing new services–not simply building out to the richest neighborhoods and “redlining” the rest.

Investing in the public infrastructure of the Internet is going to be costly–there’s no denying that. But when you consider the costs of all the lost jobs, innovation, productivity, and new ideas that come from locking out thousands of people simply due to location or price, that cost is far higher. And all the attempts to (in Wire parlance) “juke the stats” through metered broadband caps, content blocking, and other unsavory practices won’t change that.

#

Labels: , ,